Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix time_rotating argument name #4435

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 27, 2021

Conversation

slevenick
Copy link
Contributor

Upstreams: hashicorp/terraform-provider-google#8309

One of the example definitions shows rotate_days as argument of time_rotating resource.

This argument should be called rotation_days , as defined at the current resource documentation (as of today using version 0.6.0).

If this PR is for Terraform, I acknowledge that I have:

  • Searched through the issue tracker for an open issue that this either resolves or contributes to, commented on it to claim it, and written "fixes {url}" or "part of {url}" in this PR description. If there were no relevant open issues, I opened one and commented that I would like to work on it (not necessary for very small changes).
  • Generated Terraform, and ran make test and make lint to ensure it passes unit and linter tests.
  • Ensured that all new fields I added that can be set by a user appear in at least one example (for generated resources) or third_party test (for handwritten resources or update tests).
  • Ran relevant acceptance tests (If the acceptance tests do not yet pass or you are unable to run them, please let your reviewer know).
  • Read the Release Notes Guide before writing my release note below.

Release Note Template for Downstream PRs (will be copied)


One of the example definitions shows `rotate_days` as argument of `time_rotating` resource.

This argument should be called `rotation_days `, as defined at the current [resource documentation](https://registry.terraform.io/providers/hashicorp/time/latest/docs/resources/rotating#rotation_days) (as of today using version `0.6.0`).
@google-cla
Copy link

google-cla bot commented Jan 27, 2021

We found a Contributor License Agreement for you (the sender of this pull request), but were unable to find agreements for all the commit author(s) or Co-authors. If you authored these, maybe you used a different email address in the git commits than was used to sign the CLA (login here to double check)? If these were authored by someone else, then they will need to sign a CLA as well, and confirm that they're okay with these being contributed to Google.
In order to pass this check, please resolve this problem and then comment @googlebot I fixed it.. If the bot doesn't comment, it means it doesn't think anything has changed.

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: no label Jan 27, 2021
@slevenick slevenick requested review from a team and melinath and removed request for a team January 27, 2021 17:25
@modular-magician
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi! I'm the modular magician. Your PR generated some diffs in downstreams - here they are.

Diff report:

Terraform GA: Diff ( 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-))
Terraform Beta: Diff ( 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-))

@modular-magician
Copy link
Collaborator

I have triggered VCR tests based on this PR's diffs. See the results here: "https://ci-oss.hashicorp.engineering/viewQueued.html?itemId=169473"

@modular-magician
Copy link
Collaborator

I have triggered VCR tests in RECORDING mode for the following tests that failed during VCR: TestAccActiveDirectoryDomainTrust_activeDirectoryDomainTrustBasicExample|TestAccPrivatecaCertificateAuthority_privatecaCertificateAuthorityCmekExample You can view the result here: "https://ci-oss.hashicorp.engineering/viewQueued.html?itemId=169510"

Copy link
Member

@melinath melinath left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@slevenick slevenick merged commit 15328e8 into GoogleCloudPlatform:master Jan 27, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants